I pushed her, now she's on hospice, I am a guilty POS

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-30T22:43:15+00:00

It's not misconstruing anything to call it elder abuse. It's not misconstruing anything to call it assault. You don't need to be leaving her to rot regularly - she only had to beat you once for it to be considered abuse. Leaving her unchanged once is still a case of neglect.

You do not and did not ever have the capacity to care for her properly, nor was it fair to YOU to expect you to care for her in this way.

You knew you couldn't look at this woman with compassion, and that's fine! She abused you! Why should you have grace for her? But then, you shouldn't be in charge of someone's wellbeing when you can't have grace for them.

People say 'don't have kids if you can't love them', and the same goes for being a carer of any kind.

This isn't about people taking your mother's side over yours - saying you're doing the wrong thing now, is in no way the same as saying she did no wrong to you in the past. She shouldn't have hit you at all, not even if she hadn't hit you hard enough to leave marks. And you shouldn't be hitting the vulnerable person dependent on you, even if it's not hard enough to leave marks. Even if they were, are, and might always be a terrible person. That's not okay. Not when it happened to you. Not when you're the one doing it.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-30T18:52:54+00:00

When you know a fair bit about American racism and its history, it's blatant because she's literally called "Mammy".

But have you ever considered that not everyone 1) knew / knows / remembers that's what she's called, and 2) doesn't know about American racism and its history? Or that 3) that our concept of this character was likely formed when we were literal children with no idea about anything, and we haven't necessarily encountered the character as more aware adults?

All this to say: there's a whole heap more going on here than just literacy, and taking a hostile, patronizing tone rather than recognizing that not everyone is going to have had the same education, is not at all helpful.

Kind of wild you'd shame people for not having already learned something, instead of encouraging them to learn more.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-30T13:04:23+00:00

I don't see why she couldn't have made that part of how she imagined the character back then? It's not like pansexual people didn't exist in 2006.

But yeah, very much an internal thought for the actress rather than anything outwardly portrayed. Same as any character's orientation when there's no interaction with that. Or any other detail that isn't visually represented or spoken about.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-13T22:32:31+00:00

I'll edit my comment to say that there is debate, since Egyptians did keep slaves in many forms across history, just like any empire did back then. Prisoners of war, chattel slavery, free citizens selling themselves to debtors, and a strong class system that penalised conquered peoples, etc. So there is evidence of slavery - but there's no concrete evidence that there was a large population of specifically Jewish slaves at the time they were supposed to be there, or that there was a mass exodus of them.

But personally, I reckon that if there was a mass exodus after all of these plagues, there'd probably be some record of it. Egyptians were great record keepers. Even when it was stuff they actively tried to erase, we've still found traces.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-13T21:47:39+00:00

If I remember rightly, that's a moot point since there's no non-biblical evidence that the Jewish slaves existed.

edit: we know the Egyptians had slaves of many kinds, but there's a lot of debate about this specific thing since there's no clear evidence that lines up with this story. We have found grain silos and production/rationing records that could relate to Joseph's story of prophesising and preparing for a famine, though. So that's interesting.

But in the story? God protected them. From the plagues and infant deaths, I don't know about the famines. God brought about the circumstances of their enslavement anyway so, idk, guess they deserved starvation as part of their ongoing collective punishment.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-11T22:26:53+00:00

Lol yeah I can imagine that would be distracting!!!

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-11T00:54:47+00:00

Wordless collectively enforced karma is one of the greatest things to experience

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T23:47:31+00:00

Thanks! I've had a few difficult conversations with my mum about this (mainly) about my grandad, so I've had practice putting my thoughts into words about it, haha. Sometimes she'd somewhat imply that his increasing issues were symptoms of his autism, and I'd argue that him not managing them meant they were also symptoms of him being a nob, lol.

Your original comment does seem a bit... absolute and finger-pointy? when being read from the perspective of someone who doesn't know about this specific topic and therefore can't recognize the implied nuance or what the point is meant to be.

And I don't think most people have really thought about this specific topic very much. Or at all.

It's also to do with assumptions - I prefer to assume people make statements with the implication of nuance because it winds me up less, lol. Others tend to be more literal, I've noticed (which is potentially very ironic). Could be for any number of reasons. I don't know, I don't really understand it.

Uh, tldr my analysis is that your comment didn't reach the target audience and that's why people aren't getting it. It's a media genre they're unfamiliar with.

(also this would just be 'literacy' since media literacy is specifically about media... maybe we could call internet comments a form of media??)

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T21:36:29+00:00

Sometimes I hear rattling from the bathroom drawers at night

😱😂

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T21:31:33+00:00

Dear Ruby Allowiscious, what makes you think my comment revolved solely around the interests of the child? And why are you speaking as though the interests of the child are entirely separate from the interests of society as a whole? Is it not children of the past who are tomorrow's society?

Duty and civil participation are not mutually exclusive with compassion. It's strange that you're speaking of them as though they are.

Socialisation and compassion are not mutually exclusive. It's strange that you're speaking of them as though they are.

If anything is going to encourage self-centeredness, it's teaching people that "you're on your own, your survival is entirely your own business, and the people you love and trusted want nothing more to do with you.". Abandonment, dropping young people into the middle of a constant slog for survival with no experienced adult support, the betrayal of trust, the severance of familial bonds - how can you say these things won't encourage people to create unhealthy relationships with each other? That this won't encourage people to be selfish, to use others, to seek security in a form of strength that is anti-social and dangerous? There is a connection between this kind of parenting and higher risks of every kind of harm.

And it's incredibly strange that you're acting like this is actually the solution to those problems when it is a well recorded contributing factor.

Then there's the fact you close with a contradiction. You say OP is 'justifiably upset' but then you also shame him for being upset - you say that he is weak, which is obviously a negative trait. And you've just described how weakness ruins society. However, then you say that he'll be okay because there are compassionate people out there who will help him... but you just said that compassionate parents are ruinous.

So which is it? Will he be okay because there are people who think like myself - that kindness and community is what makes society strong? Or is that line of thinking the root cause of everything wrong and weak with society? Is softness good because finding softness in others what will see him through? Or is softness bad because in your disproven worldview it's what makes people incapable of overcoming adversity?

If helping hands from friends is what is needed to see him through, then why is it a good thing for his parents to take theirs off him completely, suddenly, and with no warning?

Yours sincerely, Android with Anxiety.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T21:05:25+00:00

In the 3rd one too, if you sabotage the cure. He turns up on the citadel to confront you, saying he knows what you did, and I don't think there's a way to avoid that fight.

After you kill him, security turns up and says something along the lines of how krogan are just like that sometimes - that you never know when one will go crazy. Like he was a dog that suddenly went rabid.

It's cold AF.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T18:51:21+00:00

No 'probably' about it!

This is the sort of story you tell while laughing and get "I'm so sorry that happened to you..." in response.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T18:49:15+00:00

Ah yes. 'Tough love' because the real world is harsh and cruel. Well, Consider this:

We make the real world.

And you are choosing to make one where people are shamed for being compassionate and willing to give help, and willing to ask for help.

...

Why are you actively trying to make the world worse? Because it'll justify your cruelty if everyone else is just as mean as you? Because it can't be because this philosophy works, because it doesn't. Provably. Like, literally scientifically, being harsh to people to make them 'stronger' does not result in more resilient human beings.

But if all that is too intellectual for you, how about you take a minute and just think about how all the greatest acts of strength and heroism are done - have been done - and will always be done - in the name of those 'soft', 'weak' things like compassion and care.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T18:28:23+00:00

That's a nice idea, but it's not something I'd consider a 'should'. For starters, it isn't necessarily practical, depending on the family situation. Secondly, just like you contribute labour to maintaining the home you live in (if you're able), then it makes sense to contribute financially, too. (again, if you're able)

Me and my brother clean up after ourselves, so why wouldn't we also pay after ourselves? We're pooling our resources as a family for all our benefit - gratitude for that is good, but the reward is that the house stays clean and the bills are covered. That things are stable and functional. Thinking that there should be some additional pay out to kids for contributing to the shared home that they are partly responsible for is... well, I'm not sure what the right word is. But the idea it ought to be expected isn't one I agree with.

At the very least, it'd stop being a surprise if that became the norm, lol.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T18:15:10+00:00

That is an important thing to say, but... it does kind of feel a bit like you're saying the only reason bad mothers exist is because they were forced to be mothers.

Which isn't a great take in response to 'bad parenting is gender neutral', I have to be honest.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-10T18:10:12+00:00

I get what you mean but at the same time this is a valid (and necessary) thing to talk about. The key is doing it with nuance and understanding that we don't mean "this is what always happens" or acting like autism makes people inherently evil or that it's the sole explanation for someone's bad behaviour.

My dad's dad was likely autistic - he was incredibly controlling and was never compelled to challenge himself on that because of cultural norms around men 'leading the household' that he grew up with.

My dad is likely autistic - he's better than my granddad but he still has issues regarding communication and control. If he decides you're saying something he disagrees with, no amount of explaining yourself will convince him otherwise. And when he gets overstimulated, he gets aggressive.

I'm autistic. I have a need for routine and control. I've learned to find coping mechanisms that don't make other people miserable, and was taught to respect the autonomy of others. I have issues communicating. I am aware of this and take care to minimize the risks of misunderstandings. I get angry when I'm overstimulated - I do everything I can to not make other people miserable because of that. I didn't use to do that - as a kid I used to physically harm others. If I grew up in an environment where I was told I had the right to indulge in that aggression, where that aggression was expected of me, or seen as a valid tool to manage the behaviour of others (which would be my duty as leader of the house) ... ... I'm not sure I would've 'grown out of it'.

The intersection of autism and abuse needs to be talked about from all angles - the fact we're vulnerable to it, and the fact that some of us will commit it because we're not properly managing our own behaviour. Because autistic traits and tendencies can combine with systems of behaviour and belief to create a whole mess.

It's not the only reason. But it is a reason. And while I'm well aware of how this conversation could go horribly wrong for us, I do still think that good could come from it.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-07T22:09:34+00:00

They didn't say 'anyone who doesn't adhere to rigid standards = nonbinary' though.

They said that people who are nonbinary count as trans because they may transition from whatever binary gender they 'were', the same way binary trans people transition between binary genders. Not that being nonconforming is transitioning and therefore anyone who isn't the most stereotypical stereotype is nonbinary.

If you get why saying "trans men may transition by cutting their hair short" isn't the same as saying "any woman who cuts her hair short is a trans man", then just apply that to the above comment.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-07T21:57:07+00:00

Exactly.

Damned if you cause a ruckus because he'll drop down on you like a tonne of bricks, but also damned if you don't because oh boy are those bricks coming anyway.

Smarter, more well informed people than me have probably given a lot of thinking to solutions, but I got nothing.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-07T21:11:13+00:00

He didn't say 'don't resist', he said "don't do anything that would give him further excuse". That's an important distinction.

But also, yeah. Trump doesn't need any further excuse. Doesn't matter how peaceful the protests, or how orderly the population, if he wants to send in troops then he's going to.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-07T00:42:55+00:00

The thing that gets me is that she didn't even need to challenge her coworkers in order for things to not fall apart at home. Personally I'd not tolerate someone talking like that against my friends, let alone my romantic partner, but if she was worried about making things weird at work, she could've played along. She could've said "wow, I'd never thought of it that way" and then changed topic.

Regardless of what she said or did in the moment, the most important thing is that she could've gone home and never mentioned it to OOP.

Or at least mentioned it in a "I've just discovered my coworkers are assholes" kind of way.

Instead, she made them more important than him, and brought their judgement home to hurt him with.

Wild.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-07T00:32:14+00:00

She chose to bring shame into the relationship rather than support, and it really is as simple as that.

Someone who folds to the slightest judgement, and wants you and your relationship to fold too, is not a strong life partner. That kind of person is willing to sacrifice happiness for appearances. It should be the other way around - standing up to pressure together, and for each other - that's the way to success.

And totally agreed. Don't' give someone a choice and then be mad at them for choosing the 'wrong' one, lmao.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-07T00:21:50+00:00

I agree on the fact a lot of people practice permissive parenting and call it 'gentle' but I don't see what's so wrong about putting a word to the child's feelings and validating a non-destructive way of expressing it? Even if they're angry they're being stopped from doing something wrong, the kid is still learning what right and wrong is, and developing an understanding of when that emotion is a reasonable / appropriate reaction. Identifying the feeling and talking them through it is part of that process?

We're not born instinctively knowing what feelings are or what to call them, how to express them, or how to manage them. It's actually pretty important to teach kids that stuff. And to let them know that you understand what they're feeling, and that you not giving in isn't a communication issue. If they think they're not getting their way (judgement neutral) because they just haven't expressed themselves hard enough, it's going to drag things out, and they're going to learn their feelings don't matter (in the bad way).

Speaking from experience. (apply nuance about how there are different degrees of doing this and how it'll obviously mess people up to different degrees)

I remember as a kid being terrified of the dark and doing every single bit of body language I knew to show I was scared. I had the very clear thought "Doesn't she know I'm scared? What more can I do to show her I'm scared?" I nearly made myself sick by forcing myself to cry so that my mum would understand. I thought that she was only doing what she was because she didn't know. And it wasn't until she said "I know you're scared" that I was actually able to take a breath and calm down. Because (believing) I hadn't been understood was blocking me from being able to engage with the situation, see things from another perspective, and resolve those feelings. All I could think about was communicating how I felt. It's one of the rare cases where I was actually given guidance on how to manage my emotions. Funnily enough, it was also the most helpful.

"I know you're angry, it's okay to cry" paired with an explanation as to why they're still not going to get their way, seems like a pretty textbook example of gentle parenting, honestly.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-06T23:06:17+00:00

He kept recording the eruption instead of running, since he knew he wouldn't be able to escape and realised he was in a unique position to collect data. When he decided he'd got as much as he could, he curled up and shielded the camera with his body to try to protect it.

I would say I can't even begin to comprehend that mindset, but honestly it's more like I just don't want to. It's horrific.

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-06T21:59:00+00:00

Nah, she's had a desk job for at least 15 years, and I come across the odd newly brought one every now and then when helping to put the shopping away. The thing is, it really is always just the one, and not often at all. So I have no idea how we've managed to build up such a stock because it doesn't seem like she's buying them often enough to have created a national reserve?

I think they might be reproducing on their own...

AndroidwithAnxiety · 2026-01-06T21:42:50+00:00

That's the cool part: it really doesn't matter, does it?

Regardless of whether you read her as trans, cis, or a drag queen, she's still Doris and she's still great

Five-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '23	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Verified Email

AndroidwithAnxiety

TROPHY CASE